Landing from a No Flap or a Nonstandard Flap Approach

The touchdown point is negotiated first, then held. VII.G S8 requires you to touch down at an acceptable point on the runway that is agreed upon between the applicant and the evaluator — at the appropriate speed and pitch attitude, at the agreed-upon point -250/+500 feet (ASEL, AMEL).

For seaplanes (VII.G S9), touch down at an acceptable point on the landing surface; during round out and touchdown, contact the water at the proper pitch attitude within 200 feet beyond a specified point (ASES, AMES), and for AMES the touchdown must be within the first one-third of the water landing area.

Then maintain positive aircraft control throughout the landing using drag and braking devices, as appropriate, to come to a stop (VII.G S10) — which, with a higher touchdown speed and possibly degraded lift dump, is the half of the maneuver that consumes the runway.

Nearly. Appendix 3, Area VII Task G: "This Task is required unless an airplane FSBR has indicated otherwise." The evaluator must determine whether checking on slats-only and partial-flap approaches is necessary for the practical test, and in making that determination the probability of asymmetrical flap failures should be considered (FAA-S-ACS-11A, Appendix 3).

So the specific configuration you fly is not fixed by the ACS — it comes from your airplane's failure modes and its Flight Standardization Board report. Know what your type's realistic flap and slat failures are, and which of them the FSBR calls out.

Because you removed the device that lets you fly slowly and descend steeply at the same time. Flap deflection up to 15° primarily produces lift with minimal drag; deflection beyond 15° produces a large increase in drag (AFH ch. 9, ch. 12). Without it you carry a higher approach and touchdown speed and a flatter approach path.

The AFH's figure for light airplanes: a no-flap landing requires substantially more runway, and the increase in required landing distance could be as much as 50 percent (AFH ch. 18). For a transport-category airplane, do not use that number — use the AFM's abnormal-configuration landing distance for the exact flap or slat setting you have, corrected for weight, wind, runway condition, and any inoperative spoilers, reversers, or anti-skid that came with the failure.

Work it as a landing performance assessment for the day, not a table lookup:

1. Start from the AFM abnormal/nonstandard configuration landing distance for your actual flap or slat position
2. Correct for the day — weight, pressure altitude, temperature, wind component, runway slope, and the reported runway condition code (RwyCC), contaminant type and depth, or braking action report for the portion of runway you will use (SAFO 19001)
3. Subtract what else failed with the flaps — degraded spoilers, no autobrakes, no reverse, or an anti-skid system that went with the hydraulic system
4. Add margin — the time-of-arrival assessment standard is a safety margin of at least 15 percent over actual landing distance (SAFO 19001), on top of honest accounting for the higher approach speed you will actually fly and the float that comes with it
5. Then choose the runway — length first, then wind, then surface condition, then approach type

VII.G S3 makes the crew and ATC part explicit: communicate with ATC as needed and select an airport/runway with sufficient length for landing. Ask for the long runway, tell them why, and accept the extra track miles.

SAFO 19001's definitions are precise, and the distinction moves your numbers:

• Dry — clear of contaminants and visible moisture within the required length and the width being used
• Contaminated — the runway condition report includes the type and depth (if applicable) of the substance: water, dry snow, wet snow, slush, ice, frost, sanded, or chemical treatment
• Wet — simply neither dry nor contaminated

The trap the SAFO names: the preflight wet or slippery landing data required by 121.195 and 135.385 may not provide adequate runway length for landing on a wet or contaminated surface (SAFO 19001). You are already landing long and fast by configuration; on anything other than a dry runway, run the full time-of-arrival assessment (Task III.B) with the at least 15 percent margin, and prefer the long, dry runway even at the cost of track miles — S3 grades you on asking for it.

The ACS asks you to calculate the correct airspeeds/V-speeds for approach and landing (VII.G S4). In a transport-category airplane those are AFM-published corrections for the abnormal configuration — typically a VREF increment tied to the flap or slat setting, plus any wind or ice additive your operator applies. They are type-specific and weight-specific, and this guide will not assert a number for your airplane: take them from the AFM and the FSB report.

What you can state confidently is the shape of it. The stall speed rises as flap deflection decreases, so the approach and threshold speeds rise with it. The consequence — spelled out in AFH ch. 16 — is that excess approach speed increases the minimum stopping distance required by 20 to 30 feet per knot on a dry runway and 40 to 50 feet on a wet one, and each excess knot extends the flare by approximately 250 feet. In this configuration your speed is already high by design; carrying additional speed on top of it is where the runway runs out.

S5 is explicit — establish the recommended approach and landing configuration, airspeed, and trim, adjusting pitch attitude and power as required to maintain a stabilized approach. Trim is named because a nonstandard flap setting changes the trim state substantially, and applicants fly the whole approach out of trim while fighting the airplane.

What actually changes:

• Less flap means less nose-down pitching moment from the flaps and a more nose-high deck angle to hold altitude (AFH ch. 18) — so the trim position that felt right in the normal configuration is wrong here.
• The approach speed is higher, which changes the trim requirement again; every VREF increment for the abnormal configuration is another retrim.
• Retrim after every configuration change and every power change, and finish trimming before the stabilized gate — an out-of-trim airplane on a flatter, faster approach will not hold a stable path, and the control forces mask the speed cues you need.
• In a split-flap case, do not trim away the roll. You are holding almost full aileron to keep the wings level and substantial opposite rudder (AFH ch. 18); trimming out that force can leave you with no reserve and hides how close to the limit you are. Trim pitch, hold the roll and yaw manually, and say so.

The examiner is listening for trim as a deliberate step in your flow, not as something you got around to.

The airplane sits nose-high and does not want to come down. From AFH ch. 18:

• The airplane must be flown in a relatively nose-high attitude to maintain altitude compared with flaps extended, and losing altitude is harder without the drag flaps normally provide
• A wider, longer pattern may be required to avoid diving to lose altitude and building excessive airspeed
• On final, the nose-high attitude makes it difficult to see the runway, which if not anticipated causes serious errors in judging height and distance
• The attitude can also create the perception of being close to a stall, tempting the pilot to lower the nose abruptly and risk touching down on the nosewheel
• With flaps retracted and power reduced, the airplane is slightly less stable in pitch and roll

Add the transport-category version of the same problem: the higher-than-normal deck angle changes your visual aim point and the geometry between your eye and the main gear, and it reduces tail clearance — an extended or excessive flare in this configuration risks a tail strike (AFH ch. 16, ch. 18). That is one more reason the technique is to fly the airplane onto the runway rather than hold it off.

Deliberately. Without flaps the airplane tends to float considerably during round out (AFH ch. 18), and the two failure modes are opposite: do not force the airplane onto the runway at an excessively high speed — the temptation when the float will not end — and do not flare excessively, since without flaps that can cause the tail to strike the runway (AFH ch. 18).

The jet technique from AFH ch. 16 resolves the tension: the airplane should be flown onto the runway rather than held off. A firm landing is normal and desirable — deliberate and positive, not hard — and "it is essential to fly the airplane onto the runway at the target touchdown point, even if the speed is excessive." An extended flare while speed bleeds off can consume hundreds or thousands of feet.

An asymmetric "split" flap is one in which one flap deploys or retracts while the other remains in position, and it announces itself as a pronounced roll toward the wing with the least flap deflection when the flaps are extended or retracted (AFH ch. 18).

Control-wise it is a cross-control condition. The roll is countered with opposite aileron; the yaw from the additional drag of the extended flap requires substantial opposite rudder. Almost full aileron may be required to maintain wings level, especially at the reduced airspeed necessary for approach and landing (AFH ch. 18).

The recognition discipline is to stop moving the flap handle the instant the roll appears. Whether your airplane has asymmetry protection that locks the flaps in place, and whether the split can progress after you stop commanding motion, are type-specific questions — confirm them in the AFM and the FSB report rather than assuming, because the recovery technique differs if the system will not arrest the split for you. Then diagnose from the flap position indicator, not from feel alone.

Three rules from AFH ch. 18, and they are absolute enough to memorize:

• Do not attempt to land with a crosswind from the side of the deployed flap — the additional roll control required to counteract the crosswind may not be available, because you are already holding most of the aileron you have
• Fly the approach at a higher than normal airspeed
• Do not risk an asymmetric stall and subsequent loss of control by flaring excessively — fly the airplane onto the runway so touchdown occurs at an airspeed consistent with a safe margin above flaps-up stall speed

That first rule drives runway selection before anything else: with the right flap extended, you want the wind from the left or straight down the runway. Say that in the brief.

The ones with a speed or energy number attached:

• Tire speed limits — a real limit on a hot, high, heavy landing at an increased VREF, and one that appears in the AFM limitations section
• Maximum brake energy — a high-speed, heavy landing may approach or exceed the brake energy limit, with fuse-plug release and a fire risk on the rollout
• VLE and VLO — the gear may need to come down earlier at a speed you must respect
• VFE for whatever flap setting you do have — a partial setting has its own limit speed
• Structural landing weight and touchdown sink rate — a fast, firm landing at high weight is exactly the combination the limits exist for
• Runway remaining after a long touchdown — every excess knot and every extra foot of threshold height compounds; an extra 50 feet of height over the threshold adds approximately 1,000 feet to the landing distance (AFH ch. 16)

Have the AFM open on this one during the oral. The examiner is testing whether you know where the numbers live, not whether you memorized them.

Different enough that it needs a brief. You are heavier on speed and lighter on lift, the pitch-up you normally get from flap retraction is not there, and in a split-flap case a large power application adds asymmetric drag effects to a control situation that is already near its limits.

Brief it as: decide early (the 500-foot stabilized gate from AFH ch. 16 still governs), apply power smoothly rather than abruptly, hold the attitude the AFM specifies for the configuration you have, and change nothing about the flap configuration unless the abnormal checklist tells you to. In a split-flap case, retracting the good flap to match may or may not be an approved action — that comes from the AFM, not from instinct.

Separate the three families, because the procedures diverge:

• A flap that will not move at all — an electrical, hydraulic, or drive failure, or a position where a load-relief system has intervened. The airplane is symmetric; you have a no-flap or partial-flap landing.
• A flap that will not move past a position — a partial extension, often accompanied by a slat disagreement. The airplane is symmetric but the AFM speeds are for a specific position, so confirm the actual position on the indicator.
• An asymmetry — the roll cue described in AFH ch. 18, plus a disagree annunciation on most transport-category airplanes. Stop the handle, hold the airplane, then diagnose.

Then confirm what went with it. Flaps are usually driven by a system that also drives something else — spoilers, reversers, gear, or nosewheel steering. The failure that stopped the flaps may have taken your stopping devices too, which is the difference between a long landing and an overrun.

Coordinate with crew, if applicable, and complete applicable checklists for the malfunction, approach, and landing (VII.G S2). That is three checklists, and applicants lose points by running only the first.

Sequence it:

1. Stop the handle
2. Fly the airplane
3. Run the abnormal checklist for the malfunction
4. Compute the abnormal-configuration VREF and landing distance
5. Re-brief the approach and landing with the new speeds, touchdown point, and runway requirement
6. Run the normal approach and landing checklists as amended

The re-brief is the step that gets skipped, and it is the one the evaluator is listening for — the airplane you briefed at the top of descent is not the airplane you are about to land.

Because the right touchdown point depends on the airplane and the configuration, and the ACS is type-agnostic. VII.G S8 has you touch down at "an acceptable point on the runway that is agreed upon between the applicant and the evaluator," then holds you to -250/+500 feet of it.

Pick it deliberately. The transport-category default is the touchdown target zone about 1,000 feet beyond the runway threshold (AFH ch. 16), and that is normally the right answer here too — landing long to "use the flat approach" gives away exactly the runway your higher touchdown speed needs. The performance chain is unforgiving: a 2° approach angle instead of 3° adds 500 feet to landing distance, and an extra 50 feet of threshold height adds about 1,000 feet (AFH ch. 16).

Getting the airplane on the ground and keeping it there, then stopping it in the distance you computed:

• Fly it on positively — a firm, deliberate touchdown at the target point, not a held-off greaser (AFH ch. 16)
• Get the lift off the wing — spoilers or speedbrakes, verified deployed; at a high touchdown speed the wing is still making a great deal of lift, and brakes do nothing until weight is on them
• Brakes and reverse in the sequence your SOP specifies, and monitored — if a hydraulic failure caused the flap problem, assume degraded braking until proven otherwise
• Directional control first — but know the cost: differential braking applied to maintain directional control also diminishes the effectiveness of the brakes. The AFH states this in its rejected-takeoff technique discussion (AFH ch. 16); the physics is identical on a landing rollout, so budget for it when your computed stopping distance was already long
• Do not retract anything on the rollout — reconfiguring at speed after a flap malfunction is how the wrong handle gets moved

Then get off the runway or stop, tell ATC, and consider brake temperature before you plan a taxi.

Because your options are narrower than usual and the consequences are larger. On runway selection (R2), you are choosing on aircraft limitations, available distance, surface conditions, and wind — and with a split flap, the crosswind side is a hard constraint, not a preference (AFH ch. 18). A shorter runway that solves the crosswind problem may not solve the distance problem; that tension is the decision the examiner wants to watch you make.

On wake turbulence (R3), you are flying a flatter, faster, longer approach that may put you below and behind the preceding aircraft's flight path for longer than usual, and in a split-flap case you have little roll authority in reserve to handle an upset. Ask for increased spacing explicitly, and accept the delay.

A flatter, faster, longer approach puts you where other traffic does not expect you, for longer than usual:

• You are fast on final — an increased VREF closes on preceding traffic and compresses the spacing the controller planned. Say your actual approach speed so ATC can re-sequence rather than discovering it on final.
• You are flat and low, farther out — the extended straight-in needed to avoid diving to lose altitude (AFH ch. 18) puts you through altitudes and positions a normal pattern would not use, including under traffic on downwind or base.
• A wider, longer pattern at a non-towered field takes you outside the area where other pilots are looking for you; make position reports that state the abnormal configuration and the extended final.
• Your roll authority may be committed. In a split-flap case you are holding almost full aileron (AFH ch. 18), so an evasive maneuver you would normally make is not fully available — which turns a routine conflict into a serious one. Ask for the traffic to be moved rather than planning to maneuver around it.
• Eyes are inside running three checklists and recomputing speeds (S2, S4); assign someone to look out.

Two distinct threats, and only one of them is the asymmetric stall.

Stall and loss of control. With reduced or asymmetric flaps the stall speed is higher than the one you normally fly to, and in a split-flap case the airplane will stall asymmetrically and roll toward the less-deflected wing while you are already near full aileron. The AFH's rule is absolute: do not risk an asymmetric stall and subsequent loss of control by flaring excessively — fly the airplane onto the runway so touchdown occurs at an airspeed consistent with a safe margin above flaps-up stall speed (AFH ch. 18). The no-flap version of the same error is the opposite one: the nose-high attitude creates the perception of being close to a stall, tempting an abrupt nose-down input and a nosewheel-first touchdown (AFH ch. 18).

CFIT. This is the dimension applicants miss. A flatter approach path flown faster over a longer final means you are lower, farther out, for more time than the procedure designers assumed — a shallower-than-3° path near terrain, obstacles, or an approach's step-down fixes. Concretely: a 2° approach angle instead of 3° adds 500 feet to landing distance (AFH ch. 16), and it also puts you meaningfully below the normal glidepath miles from the runway. So fly the vertical guidance you have rather than eyeballing the flat picture, respect minimum altitudes even though the airplane does not want to descend later, and if the path forces you into terrain-critical airspace, choose a different runway or a different airport (R2, S3).

• Flying the normal VREF. The speeds come from the AFM for the actual configuration (S4); the normal-landing page does not apply.
• Computing distance without the associated failures. No spoilers, no reverse, or no autobrakes changes the answer more than the flap setting does.
• Continuing to move the flap handle after the first sign of asymmetry.
• Accepting a crosswind from the deployed-flap side — the AFH's prohibition, and the one that ends in a runway excursion (AFH ch. 18).
• Excessive flare — a tail strike in a no-flap landing, an asymmetric stall in a split-flap landing (AFH ch. 18).
• Landing long because the flat approach and the float made the aim point drift, then busting -250/+500 feet with a longer stopping distance to cover.
• Skipping the re-brief after the new numbers are computed (S2).
• Not asking for the runway you need. S3 grades communicating with ATC and selecting an airport and runway with sufficient length — accepting the runway offered because it was offered is the wrong instinct here.